No charges in woodcarver shooting by Seattle police officer

Satterberg: Shooting 'troubling,' charges unwarranted

By CASEY MCNERTHNEY and LEVI PULKKINEN, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF

Published 10:00 pm, Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Photo: Joshua Trujillo/seattlepi.com

Image 1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

King County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg points to the Washington State law regarding use of force by a police officer while announcing he will not not pursue criminal charges against Seattle Police Officer Ian Birk during a press conference on Wednesday at the King County Courthouse. Birk shot and killed Native woodcarver John T. Williams in August. less

King County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg points to the Washington State law regarding use of force by a police officer while announcing he will not not pursue criminal charges against Seattle Police ... more

Calling the shooting "troubling," Satterberg said that the "obvious and legally available defenses" -- chiefly that there is no evidence indicating Birk acted with malice toward Williams, as required by state law -- would leave a jury with only one decision if asked to convict Birk.

"A jury would be compelled to find Officer Birk not guilty," Satterberg said.

"There is no evidence to show malice," the elected prosecutor continued. "There's no evidence to refute Officer Birk's claim that he acted in good faith."

Birk shot and killed Williams, 50, during daylight hours on Aug. 30 after confronting him at the intersection of Boren Avenue and Howell Street in downtown Seattle. Birk later told a jury at a non-binding shooting inquest that Williams was carrying an open knife; Birk fired seconds after telling Willaims to drop the knife.

Satterberg went on to note that he understands why the shooting caused concern among the public. He said he shared that concern, but asserted that a fruitless criminal prosecution would not be appropriate.

"The officer seems to have made serious tactical errors that compounded the danger to others and himself," Satterberg said.

"By his own actions, Officer Birk closed the distance between himself and the man with a knife."

A homeless man often seen carving wood on Seattle streets, Williams death was portrayed by his family and others as police brutality and prompted protests around the city.

A non-binding shooting inquest saw a King County jury split on whether the Aug. 30 shooting was justified. Jurors returned mixed decisions on whether Williams actually posed a threat to Birk, or whether Birk saw the other man as a threat.

Witnesses to the shooting testified that Williams -- a heavy drinker who had mental health problems -- wasn't threatening the officer and that Birk may have fired in haste. Birk, however, maintained that he feared for his life and had to shoot Williams.

The shooting has drawn public criticism, with Williams' supporters demanding Birk be charged with murder in the killing. The slaying was the most publicized incident in a series of violent interactions between citizens and Seattle police that have prompted a federal investigation of the department on a number of issues, presumably including Williams' death.

In a statement Wednesday, attorneys for Williams' family faulted Satterberg's decision and claimed that video of the moments before the shooting shows Birk acted with malice.

"Satterberg's decision not to bring any charges against Ian Birk for killing the late John T. Williams is wrong about the facts, wrong about the law and wrong as a matter of public policy," the attorneys said in a statement.

Birk, who was hired the Seattle Police Department in 2008, was told in November to surrender his gun and badge. He was not armed with a Taser when the shooting occurred.

"I am very disappointed in the King County Prosecutor's decision not to file criminal charges regarding the death of Mr. John T. Williams. This matter demonstrates that changes to state law regarding the Public Inquest proceedings should be made," Harrell said in a statement. "Officer Birk should be disciplined to the fullest extent provided under the internal process used by the City of Seattle...We must adopt a zero tolerance culture relative to the unlawful use of force. "

Satterberg: State law would not support charge

Speaking Wednesday, Satterberg cited a 25-year-old state law mandating that police officers not by held criminally liable for using deadly force if they acted "without malice and a good faith belief" that their actions were justified.

In Birk's case, Satterberg said a jury could not possibly find, unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt, that the officer acted with malice or that he did not believe Williams was going to attack him. The prosecutor noted that whether Williams actually intended to hurt anyone remains an unanswerable question, but that Birk's perception of a threat would establish reasonable doubt and demand an acquittal if he was charged.

Satterberg also dismissed the suggestion that filing charges against Birk would serve some public good, that doing so would rebuild trust lost do to the shooting. But, he said, the facts of the case simply would not support a conviction.

"There is no evidence to show malice," Satterberg said. "There is no evidence to refute Officer Birk's claim that he acted in good faith. There is simply no evidence to overcome the strong legislative directive not to prosecute a police officer under these circumstances."

Satterberg went on to acknowledge that the shooting has caused significant concerns in the community. He said he personally received 1,200 e-mails on the matter, and has met with representatives for the Williams' family.

"I understand the concerns of many community members who are deeply disturbed by this shooting, and I understand why many are calling for accountability from this officer, and actions by the city to bridge a deep divide of mistrust," Satterberg said. "But I must also follow the law of the state, and the directive of the Legislature, and I will not file criminal charges when the law clearly permits a police officer to make a good faith mistake, however tragic and terrible."

Attorneys for Williams' family argued that Satterberg placed undue weight on Birk's testimony and ignored statements from other witnesses. They also faulted Satterberg for relying in part on the inquest jury decision, which they described as "badly flawed."

"Its only function now seems to be to protect police officers from the consequences of their wrongful actions and to give politicians cover for their decisions to do nothing about it," the attorneys said in a statement released Wednesday afternoon.

The attorneys went on to contend Satterberg's decision could be reversed at a later date, as there is no statute of limitations on murder in Washington.

Decision follows split inquest

Satterberg's announcement followed a split decision by an inquest jury asked to review the case in a non-binding inquiry into the facts of the shooting.

Four of eight jurors said they believed Birk thought Williams posed a threat during the Aug. 30 incident. Three couldn't determine whether he did. Only one juror believed Williams actually posed a threat.

Speaking after the inquest, Williams' older brother, Rick, said his brother didn't have enough time to react. He questioned how the decision to shoot could have been made so quickly.

An attorney for the Williams family, Andrea Brenneke, said after the inquest that the family plans to honor John. T. Williams by creating a large totem pole in a design that he.

"In terms of the process that exists," Brenneke said after the inquest, "we're pleased that it's over and that the findings are consistent with what we understand, which was that Mr. Williams was walking along the street with the tools of his trade as a carver and as no threat to anyone."

Buck said he thought the jurors used hindsight to determine that Williams was drunk when he was shot to death, and that he couldn't fully understand the situation -- something the officer didn't know when he fired. A police-cruiser video of the incident, Buck said, showed Williams had ample time to put the knife down during the confrontation with the officer.

"Four seconds is an eternity in a deadly force scenario," Buck said.

Buck also said jurors didn't get the full picture of Williams.

Multiple police videos from early August 2010, the same month Williams was shot, show the carver appearing drunk. In one case, at Dick's Drive-In on Capitol Hill, Williams was recorded swearing at an officer and saying, "I'll (expletive) kill you, all you police force."

During the inquest, several witnesses testified that Williams wasn't threatening Birk during the incident, and some said they thought Birk acted more aggressively than they would have expected in that situation.

Tim Ford, the attorney for Williams' family, repeatedly pointed out that no witnesses reported seeing Williams threaten or attack anyone on Aug. 30. Buck countered that no witness had a clear view or recollection of everything that happened.

From the witness stand, Birk said Williams didn't look confused, didn't put his hands up and didn't show any sign he would comply with the officer's order to drop the knife. The officer told the court he didn't think Williams' initial look back was a sign of compliance, and that it would have been a stretch for Williams to place the knife on a nearby wall.

Birk contended he was left with no other reasonable alternative but to shoot Williams.

"I utilized all the time I felt that I had," said Birk, 27. "But the situation escalated certainly more quickly than I could have known or predicted."